Are High-Achieving Women Doomed to Be Single and Childless?

The romantic consequences of women's educational and labor market success

Age-old scare tactics assert that women who are “too” educated or high-earning will have trouble finding a husband—which, the scare mongers assume, is women’s only true source of happiness (for example: Susan Patton 2013). Ignoring for the moment that finding a spouse is at least as important to men (see my July 2014 blog posting) and that single women are not necessarily unhappy, is it even true that highly-educated women face worse marital prospects?

Women are attaining higher education than men—71 percent of women graduating high school in 2012 enrolled in college, compared to only 61 percent of male high school graduates (Pew 2012). This may be attributed in part to a higher incidence of disciplinary problems among young men, but it also reflects a gender reversal in career aspirations—more young women than men state that being successful in a high-paying career or profession is very important in their lives (Pew 2012). If men indeed avoid highly-educated, high-earning wives, women’s successes may depress marriage rates in future generations.

But are highly-educated women romantically-undesirable, doomed to end up single and childless?

Even among baby-boomers, one of the first generations to come of age after women’s mass entry into paid employment, college-educated women and men were about equally likely to marry by age 46 (88 percent of women and 90 percent of men; Bureau of Labor Statistics 2013). More to the point, the college-educated were more likely to marry than their less-educated, same-gender counterparts and their marriages were substantially less likely to end in divorce. Clearly, women’s high education per se has never made them romantically undesirable, but what if women have higher education than their (potential) husbands? As women have surpassed men in educational attainment, such marriages must become increasingly common for highly-educated women’s marriage rates to remain stable.

Historically, marriages in which wives were more educated than their husbands faced a higher risk of divorce, compared to couples in which husbands were more highly-educated (Schwartz and Han 2014). However, as it has become increasingly common for wives’ education to exceed their husbands’ education this difference in divorce risk has disappeared (Schwartz and Han 2014). In addition, the relative stability of marriages between equally-educated spouses has increased, compared to marriages in which spouses’ education levels differ (Schwartz and Han 2014). This reflects a broad change in the meaning of marriage as couples shift away from gender-specialization toward equality. Modern couples generally do not expect women to retreat into domesticity after marriage, nor do they expect men to be solely responsible for economic provision. In fact, when adults are asked to rank the importance of nine items often associated with successful marriages, sharing household chores ranks third—ahead of having adequate income, good housing, common interests, shared religious beliefs, and children (Pew Research 2007). Moreover, contrary to the stereotypical image of wives nagging husbands to help around the home, men are slightly more likely than women to rate sharing chores as very important.

Nor are highly-educated women doomed to involuntary childlessness. On average, highly-educated women marry at age 27 and have their first child at age 30—later than their less-educated counterparts, but well before the “biological clock” decimates their chances of conception (Barkhorn 2013). True, childlessness is most common among the most highly-educated women but the fertility gap between more and less-educated women is closing (Pew Research 2010). Since the 1970s, childlessness has risen for all racial and ethnic groups and for women of most education levels, but it has fallen over the past decade for women with advanced degrees (Pew Research 2010). Moreover, it is not clear how many childless college-educated women are involuntarily childlessness—many may have made a choice not to have children.

Marriage has changed since the days of Ozzie and Harriet. In today’s relatively egalitarian unions, women’s career prospects boost their marital prospects (Sweeney and Cancian 2004). Highly-educated women are not excluded from marriage—instead, they enjoy higher marital rates and lower divorce rates than their less-educated counterparts. Attempts to frighten women into early marriage may do substantial harm and little (if any) good. Those who marry young face a higher risk of divorce (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2013) and women who marry later enjoy higher earnings (Barkhorn 2013). Similarly, women’s earnings are about 10 percent higher for each year that they delay their first birth (Miller 2011). Advocates of early marriage have yet to explain why they desire a higher divorce rate and a larger gender-wage gap. In the meantime, women (and men) would be well-advised not to jettison their education or career in search of a spouse.

Three degrees, mid 6 figure income, and in great shape. If she can do better than me, then good for her, it would be most impressive.

Now I'm a bit atypical but part of this needs to be being all the man you can be. Lots of guys just want to coast in life and then are surprised their wife doesn't want to watch them decay while bringing them a beer.

I am a successful professional and I have a six-figure income and I'm in pretty good shape and I look 15 years younger than my age, but...

...I'm not a smug dick about it.

Life is hard for a lot of people. Some people are under a lot of stress and haven't had the opportunities and luck that I have. Not everyone has great genes, or has been injury free in their lives. They are not "coasting" -- many are just hanging on.

Yes, there are a lot of guys out there that have "let themselves go", but they are still valuable fathers, faithful husbands and good providers.

If that's not good enough for some women, then its they that aren't good enough.

Yes, there are a lot of guys out there that have "let themselves go", but they are still valuable fathers, faithful husbands and good providers.

If that's not good enough for some women, then its they that aren't good enough.

Smug dick checking in......

Sorry but sex isn't about being a "good husband" its about being a turn on. Unless both partners just don't care, you can't expect one to be a high achiever and be turned on by the slacker just because they are good with kids and don't cheat. I work my ass off to stay in good a shape as possible, and don't give me the genes excuse BS, genes might make it easier but when I don't have those genes. I have "if you want to be somewhat good looking you have to watch everything you eat and work out 3-4 times a week" genes.

Its not about being the best its about being the best you can be, and if when you were 20 something you were pretty good looking and she liked you then, you can still achieve something akin to that at 40 or more.

If my wife were to gain 80lbs due to sloth and stop caring I'd be sad about the divorce, and know shes a great mother and friend, but sex is part of our relationship too.

Spouses OWE it to each other to stay sexy beyond being good providers or parents.

...And probably more full of shit than substance. I deal with you guys all the time.

Oh a psychiatric diagnosis, excellent. Do you really think successful guys are humble and don't know it? Of course we do, but we don't talk about it in public because that is poor conversation skills. No one wants to hear how awesome you are. We could spend a good few hours talking about status and how its manifested in ways to not be boasting but achieve the same goals but thats not the issue.

The issue is that we have a lot of whining guys in this thread, whining about how bad all women are, when thats not the case. There are bad women, and at best, what can be said for these men is they made bad choices.

People find their own level in a long term relationship based on looks, income, personality, and status. If one of those figures is too out of line with the other, the relationship will have issues. Where people rank these will be different. Men base higher on looks, women on status, but all matter to each.

The other side of this post would be "why are so many good women being abandoned?" Funny thing about that is that they have always been, its why we have the term "trophy wife". As a womans looks fade its almost expected for men of wealth/status to "upgrade" and while its reviled, its so common place that its just accepted as something that happens.

Well women get to play that game too. I see it in my profession, as guys who latched onto women for the womans status lose the respect of their husbands who start to view them as their meal ticket to be lazy. They tend to get divorced and I can't blame the women.

Education makes women believe that they are worth more and that they deserve the best. The second best won't do.
The unmarried and childless women have rejected many beta males, who would have given them a good home life. The alpha males won't have them, since they can find nice and quiet wives.

Women need to get over the alpha male attraction. It's hard because they fall in love with such guys. There is a need to overcome the whispers of our foremothers. Please marry a wimp!

My girlfriend is 15 years younger than me, I was the one that was more concerned about age (no, she doesn't have "daddy issues" or want my money -- unless that helps you accept reality).

I'm not against women my own age, but they are either surly or they are done with sex and ready to get old. I had one women (my age) tell me that she was done with having lots of sex and now just wants someone to cuddle with...

...lucky me. She's done being the town whore and now wants me to sit on the couch and rub her aging feet.

That statement 'Done being the town whore' totally knocked you out of any intelligent, self-respecting woman's league - regardless of age. You don't know much about biology. Woman's ovaries go into over drive during their late 30's and early 40's. They don't produce less hormones. They produce more. There's a good chance that a woman in this age group will have more estrogen than a 20 year old. This is why their sex drive goes through the roof. Woman's sex drives peak later in life so you better stock up on Viagra when your wife turns 40. Hopefully your prostate will be in good shape so you can keep up. Maybe she'll be divorcing you instead of hanging out with some old guy who just wants to lay around on the couch and cuddle.

In exactly the same way that younger women have used older men, older women will be used by younger men. How could any idiot presume that women have higher morals than men? Older women with money will go after younger, hunkier men - just as older men go after younger, more ripe women. I hope no one here assumes differently. If they do, they're only fooling themselves. Younger men cannot reproduce with older women due to fertility issues. Older women are "safe".

My Take on the Future of the World

Women are quite happy to depend on the government if the father doesn't meet her expectations. Men are quite happy too, as higher taxes are a lot better than complete financial annihilation through divorce. Governments love higher taxes. Many same sex couples are going to want children. As the decline in heterosexual “marital” relationships continues (and it will), more and more will opt for same sex relationships/domestic partnerships/cohabitation. Traditionalist views on relationships will gradually become extinct (like the dodo and dinosaur). Polygamist like relationships and/or the broad acceptance of polygamist domestic partnerships amongst heterosexuals, bisexuals, homosexuals and lesbians will become more popular as well.

Female empowerment means that there are fewer men capable of providing for a family (hence the decline of marriage). Women want the highest paying, most prestigious jobs for themselves. As divorce is nearly a death sentence for breadwinning males, men are opting out of marriage and family.

Most every bread winning man now knows the devastating consequences that divorce can have on their lives. The result of divorce is often severe psychological, emotional, legal, physical and financial destruction. For these reasons, men will continue to opt out of marriage and family or resort to cohabitation as a lessor of the two evils. As women become the majority of breadwinners (and they will), they’ll feel the same way.

Feminism taught women that marriage was slavery. Breadwinning men now know that marriage is a death trap (took them long enough). Both sides are in many ways correct. Women were at one point in time abused in marriage and through divorce, left destitute. They're not going back to those times. For the past several decades, the shoe has been on the other foot and it's mostly men that have been destroyed through divorce. Men are opting out in ever growing numbers.

The liberal/feminist model of heterosexual marriage has and will continue to fail. Most men aren’t going to allow themselves to be ruled by women in relationships. Women think they want to have power over men in relationships, but have no respect for and are repulsed by the men that aren’t at least their equal in terms of education, finances and social standing. Both sides under the liberal/feminist model are far more promiscuous, more likely to commit adultery and more likely to indulge in infidelity – even in the face of STDs. The playing field for the worst in human behavior is level under the feminist/liberal model.

To sustain the population, prop up the GDP through population growth and to save the entitlement programs, the only solution from the government’s standpoint is mass welfare and tax breaks for single mothers and/or mass immigration. As xenophobia is common everywhere, the preferred method is going to be the mass acceptance of single motherhood and a massive increase in services for single mothers (through higher taxes and/or the diversion of tax funds). More resources will be dedicated to same sex couples under this expanding model as well. This change is social values has been around for a while, is the norm in certain countries (the Netherlands, for example) and will eventually become the norm across the globe.

As time marches on, fewer and fewer will marry, out of wedlock births will become the majority, polygamy will be legalized, same sex marriage will become more popular and children raised by same sex couples will become widely accepted. The alternative is the threat of massive population decline like that found in Japan. A return to a "traditional culture" like that of the '50s is highly unlikely for obvious reasons.

As marriage/birth rates decline, huge increases in spending on single mothers will ensue (it already has in several countries). As time passes, greater and greater efforts to enact legislation that benefits women at the expense of men’s lives will increase. Even though women already have enormous gynocentric privilege through current laws and policies, ever more misandric legislation is currently being pushed across the globe.

What's happening in the Netherlands and Scandinavia is spreading globally; Japan, Singapore, Canada, the UK, the Middle East, Hong Kong, the US, etc. Parts of the Netherlands and Scandinavia are widely touted as social(ist) utopias in American mainstream media. What’s not talked about by the mainstream media is the declining marriage/birth rates, high taxes, high cost of goods, the increase in misandry through legislation and social upheaval due to mass immigration. What’s not talked about is that, where mass immigration is used to counter low marriage/birth rates, what follows is social upheaval, unsustainable spikes in welfare costs, the formation of xenophobic immigrant communities, the illegal implementation of laws within these communities (sharia – for example) and a disproportionate increase in crime emanating from these communities. In the US, immigration is used as a form of low-wage and/or slave labor and as a means to stagnate/lower wages.

Because of the above, the push for ever more misandric laws will increase. Why? Because women make the babies and women won’t have the same power over men that they had through marriage. Cohabitation reform (aka: palimony) is going to come soon (to force transfer of wealth from men to women). This is already being proposed in the UK and other places. Redefining domestic abuse (in marriage/cohabitation) in terms of bullying and denying monetary resources is also being pushed in the UK and other places (to force the transfer of resources from men to women). “Yes Means Yes” is just another way for women to destroy men’s lives when women don’t get what they want and/or to preserve women’s desire for lack of personal agency and responsibility (women don’t want to be held accountable for their actions and they want men to be punished when a woman doesn’t get what she wants). It’s going to get much, much worse for men. Hades hath no wrath…

Queue MGTOW:

MGTOW is the natural, equal and opposite reaction to misandric gender feminists and naïve white knights. MGTOW is the growing realization by men that they are disposable (think male only selective service). MGTOW is the realization among men that marriage/relationships 2.0 can lead to disastrous psychological, emotional, legal, financial, physical and spiritual destruction. MGTOW is a survival strategy. MGTOW don't validate themselves through relationships with women.

MGTOW get it. MGTOW understand cultural misandry. MGTOW are the next step in the evolution of men. To understand MGTOW, one has to ask themselves questions developed by MRAs:

Why do men pay 97% of alimony and child support when men and women are equal?
Why do men get tougher prison sentences for equal crimes?
Why is there still affirmative action for women when women make up half the work force and a higher percentage of college graduates?
Why do women want quotas for the highest paid, most powerful, most prestigious positions and not the dirty, dangerous, life threatening positions?
If men and women are equal, why is most social spending directed at women (cancer research, homeless shelters, welfare for single mothers, etc.)?
Why is circumcision not considered genital mutilation?
Why is selective service male-only?
Why don’t men have reproductive rights? Why does “my body, my choice” equate to men’s money?
Don’t the above questions represent blatant, massive discrimination against men solely for the benefit of women? Of course they do. Women make the babies.

How do MRAs and MGTOW differ? MGTOW understand that society will become increasingly misandric as time goes on. MGTOW fully appreciate that MRAs, although noble, are wasting their time. MGTOW represents an evolution of MRA.

Many women view MGTOW as misogynists. Why? They’re choosing the only escape from discrimination against men that exists. What’s that? Minimizing, to the extent possible, women’s destructive influence and power over their lives (AKA: relationships and marriage 2.0). This pisses many women off – so they label MGTOW (and men in general) as misogynists – thereby making the word meaningless (anyone that doesn’t think gynocentrically or with feminist overtones is now a misogynist/extremist).

Feminism and anti-feminism are two sides of the same coin. Both wish to hold onto the aspects of the patriarchy that benefit them the most while eschewing the aspects of the patriarchy that don’t specifically benefit women. The difference between a feminist and anti-feminist amounts to cherry picking.

Bravo, Tao Evadendi. I agree with most everything you have written. My only point of contention is the part where you say the government will grow GPD with the acceptance of single motherhood instead of mass immigration. It's too late for that. We have already accepted more illegal immigrants into this country than most countries have people. We just accepted 11 million illegals, not including their anchor children who have automatic citizenship. There are 242 countries in the world and 166 of them have less than 11 million people. The average illegal has 4 children. The majority of California is now Mexican/Mexican American. The US population will continue to grow due to illegal immigration and their high birthrate. And because it is unsustainable, we will quickly devolve into a 3rd world country.

Very interesting. The only thing you didn't mention was what effect technology will have on future generations. Machines have replaced people in many jobs and that will continue. Computers and A.I. along with robotics has the potential of eventually replacing most, if not all, jobs. With few or no jobs available, the capitalistic system will fail and a new system will develop. When that happens, the need for population growth (to support capitalism) will end. Child birth (within limitations) will be seen as more as a burden to the system and will be discouraged. There are far reaching implications when this happens, but when it does, the value of men and women will diminish, together. This whole discussion about men and women will be moot.

Two hundred years ago, people couldn't imagine the world we live in today. Two hundred years from now, I suspect the same thing.

In the mean time, these inequities that are developing between men and women will drag society down and these men who blindly support these inequities will find their male prodigy unable to have decent lives. It's the old adage... cutting off your nose to spite your face. The one thing about policy makers is that they are good at fixing problems, but not so good at seeing the far reaching effects of their decisions.

Make no mistake, I support equal opportunity, but going beyond that will lead to revolt.

There is a great deal of discussion about improving the lives of women, but very little discussion about fixing societies real problem, poverty. All over the United States there are people who barely survive day to day. Entire neighborhoods are low income and the people who live in these neighborhoods see no way out.

As for the subject of this blog, income and job description plays no part in whether a man finds a woman desirable. If there is a problem it's more along the lines of these women becoming too much like men. Personally, I enjoy intelligent women, but I find aggressiveness to be a undesirable, that includes aggressive men too.

I think a better question is why do people feel that marriage is necessary? It serves no purpose in today's society and I suspect, even less in the future. Besides, I suspect that waiting for career development before having children can have a negative affect on children.

If you want to reduce the number of people living in poverty, tell people around the world with no money and no education to stop having 5 or 6 kids. You can give away as much food as you want, but as long as there is exponential population growth, we will never be able to outrun all the needy. Poor, needy people make more poor, needy people faster than we can possibly help them.

We need to start a global campaign to encourage female education and sensible family planning. Most importantly, we need to change the perception that reckless fertility is a good thing. We need to start shaming over breeders. I would say that is defined as people who have more than two children. We need to start creating tangible incentives for people to have smaller families. It has to be a global campaign. Unless we can get China and India on board, we are screwed.

This article goes well with the views of Karen Horney. She stated that there are conflicts in women's roles, the tradiotional against the modern. Should a women find a man, or her own identity? Thankfully, the time has come where a woman does not have to exclude one for the other, but would be wise to create her own career and identity before marriage.

Career Women are the Real Reason why many of us Good Men are still Single today because they're so very Greedy And Selfish since it is always about them. And God forbid if they would ever go with a man that makes much Less Money than they do which really would be a Miracle. Quite a Change in the women of today compared to the Good old fashioned women of years ago that were so completely Different which many of us Good Men would have been all settled down by now had we been born back then since it was Very Easy finding Love in those days which today it is like looking for a Needle in a Haystack.

The reason they can not find a man is really very simple.
Short answer: they are dating above your sexual market value and are overvaluing themselves.
If you want a man to marry you, you must be his best option. If he can get a younger, more beautiful women, with better personality and more virtue, he will. He may have a short term hook up with you, if he is lonely right now. But he will not take you seriously if he has much better options.
It is like if an average joe tries to pick up hot, young women. They will brush him off in seconds. He must look for average looking women, because that is the most he can get.
Men and women are attracted to different things, men are mainly attracted to, in this order: 1) youth and beauty, 2) virtue, 3) personality. Women are mainly attracted to, in this order: 1) money and status, 2) alpha trades, 3) personality.
Notice that career, money, and being strong and independent are not in that list for what men are attracted to. Men have more of what women want, usually in his late 30´s or early 40´s, which is money, status, etc. And women have more of what men what usually in her 20´s, looks and virtue. So, it is much easier for a 30 or 40-year-old man to pick up a woman in her 20´s that it is for a man in his 20´s.
So, if you are a 40 year old women looking for a man in his 40´s to marry you in NY, just simply forget it, specially if he is very successful. You missed your window to get the hot rich men in NY. If you want commitment, try men in their 50´s or 60´s, honestly.

Well since the great majority of these women really think they really are the greatest thing walking the face of this earth with their noses up in the air, which they have the worse attitude of them all along with no manners and personality either. It is very sad that most of these women are like this now which unfortunately they really have destroyed On Line dating for many of us very serious good men looking for an honest relationship today. I really can't believe how very awful that most women are nowadays since back in the past which most women at that time were Real Ladies and the very complete opposite of today. A much better class of women that we had back in the good old days which is why love really did come easy with no problem at all. And i will certainly say that most women back then really did put these very pathetic loser women today to total shame altogether as well. Career women are total losers as well in my book. No wonder why many of us good single men can't find love at all now since we really aren't to blame here at all, especially when many of these women for no reason at all will Curse at us men when we will just say good morning or hello to them. MGTOW is the very smart and safe way for many of us men now which will certainly save our life altogether.